212 comments on Dr James Hansen: Can We Still Avoid Dangerous Human-Made Climate Change?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
212 comments on Dr James Hansen: Can We Still Avoid Dangerous Human-Made Climate Change?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Blogroll
- ASPO The official site of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas.
- Energy Bulletin Clearing house for news regarding the peak in global energy supply.
- PowerSwitch Dedicated to raising awareness & discussion of the impending & permanent decline of cheap oil & gas supply.
- ODAC Oil Depletion Analysis Centre working to raise awareness and promote better understanding of the world's oil-depletion problem.
- Global Public Media Public service broadcasting for a post carbon world.
- Post Carbon Institute Learning to live in a low energy world.
- PeakOil.com US site and forum to educate and promote awareness of global hydrocarbon depletion.
- FEASTA The Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability
- Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) This website describes an effective and fair response both to climate change and oil/gas depletion
Other Blogs
User login
Personnel
Editors
Contributors
Peak Oil Primers
Archives
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Vital Trivia
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.





GAIA Host Collective
CO2 emissions is a problem now. Because the feedback effects could kill us. By the time we take action, the biosphere could already have lost its capacity to restore the damage.
And because it will take so long to deal with the CO2 emissions of very long lived equipment: power plants last 50 years, cars last 15 years, planes last 30+ years, etc. China has something like 100 coal plants under construction, and once built, carbon sequestration is that much harder to implement (to the point where it will probably never be implemented on those plants).
Peak oil? It's a big unknown. My own view is that we will hit PO (by the definition of an exhaustible resource) but more likely in 2020-30 than on Thanksgiving Day 2005 (Deffyes' date, I believe).
There are a *lot
of alternatives to conventionally produced oil out there: tar sands in Canada, heavy oil in Venezuala, the Fischer-Tropf coal-to-oil process, NGLs. All of these can, and will be scaled heavily (Canada alone will be 5 m b/d). And there is still Arctic oil, deep water oil, plus further exploration and production in Africa.But note the CO2 consequences of widespread coal-to-oil projects.
The state-owned oil companies that control most of the world's oil resources are underinvested and undermanaged. Saudi Aramco is perhaps the best, but in Mexico, Russia, Iran, Venezuala etc, there are serious issues. So there is likely to be more oil squeezed out there.
* peak gas, or at least accessible peak gas, worries me more, oddly. We can substitute gas for oil in a lot of applications, but we don't have ready substitutes for gas (except more coal!). And from Simmons gas graphs at least, 'old gas fields don't fade away, they just die'. We don't readily have the transport infrastructure to get the gas from where it is, to where it is needed, even if we do have that gas.
Your view is not supported either by data or mathematics. There's presently no information to counter the reasoning that we've passed the midpoint of depletion for Convencional Oil in 2005.
You should also explain that increase in Unconventional Oil production if you're aware of the Gas constraints in America.
Oil demand has risen since then. Inventories haven't fallen, as far as I am aware.
Prices have fallen.
If you have rising demand, and stable inventories, then supply has risen.
There is enough gas in Canada for tar sands needs, especially if you count in the Mackenzie Delta and Arctic gas reserves. There might not be enough gas to keep Ontario's lights on, but there is enough gas for tar sands.
Totale is looking at building a nuclear reactor in the tar sands to supply steam.
Luis is talking about conventional oil.
How long tar sands production/unconventional sources can keep up with a 4-5% decline rate in conventional oil production is the big question.
Sorry folks, but it looks like basic supply and demand laws are functioning... and will be at least for the observable future.
LOL - I missed this gem.
Please set the scene for us at the Empire Club as the PM of Canada attempts to explain to his audience that in order for tar sand ops to continue, they must freeze!
NRCAN pegs a 'possible' tripling of production to 3mmbbl/d by 2020 but I highly doubt that as water and NatGas usage rates (let alone the fact that we are using gold to make lead) are completely unsustainable.
The GHG impact of the whole affair accounts for 1/3 of total Canadian inputs - 1/3!
Suffice to say there are already calls for a moratorium on expansion by the city, native groups, greens and opposition parties alike.
I agree by 2020 3m b/d is pushing the infrastructure to its limits. But by 2040 or so, 5m b/d seems very possible.
On the natural gas question, what I have is the data point that 0.8 mcf is needed to produce one barrel of oil from tar sands. (that was in the fact sheet for one of the income trusts).
5m b/d is 1.825bn b/d pa, which is therefore 1.46bn mcf. I haven't done the reserves comparison (which would have to include the Mackenzie Delta and offshore Arctic Reserves) but this doesn't seem to be impossible. And there is the possibility of using 'mini nuke' nuclear reactors as steam sources.
Water is tricky, but again not impossible. 1. better recycling of water 2. pipe it from further away.
I suspect carbon sequestration will be used for the later plants, to reduce CO2 emissions.
At some price for oil, the political constraints can be bought off. As Alberta's population rises, it will get more and more difficult for a Federal Government to ignore that electoral impact, and Alberta itself needs that development and investment. When the Feds and the Provinces get aligned, things happen (think the reforms to the Canada Pension Plan).
This statement is nonsensical, moreover, you completely hand wave the moratorium calls away.
Meanwhile, the Mackenzie Delta pipeline is already held up by the D'nay nation nor have we covered how said pipeline is going to traverse a tundra of buckling permafrost.